Summary
dismissing complaint
Summary of this case from Baccus v. The State of S.C. Criminal Justice Sys.Opinion
C/A No. 9:12-2440 DCN
10-17-2012
John Baccus, #187393, a/k/a John Roosevelt Baccus, Plaintiff, v. Chris Florian; Jordan Moore; William P. Byars, Jr; NC Merchant; NFN Davis; Larry Cartledge; NFN Claytor; NFN Maudy; William K. Sutter; Nikki R. Haley; Cheron M. Hess; Greenville County Sheriffs Office, Civil Division; Paul B. Wickensimer, Greenville Co. Clerk of Court; Gwendolyn O. Chiles, Office of the Clerk; Judge William P. Keesley; Steven M. Pruitt, SC Adm. Law Court; Judge Philip Lenske; and Honorable R. Knox Mahon, Defendants.
ORDER
The above referenced case is before this court upon the magistrate judge's recommendation that the complaint be dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process.
This court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the magistrate judge's report to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, absent prompt objection by a dissatisfied party, it appears that Congress did not intend for the district court to review the factual and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge. Thomas v Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Additionally, any party who fails to file timely, written objections to the magistrate judge's report pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) waives the right to raise those objections at the appellate court level. United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1208 (1984).Objections were timely filed on October 16, 2012.
A de novo review of the record indicates that the magistrate judge's report accurately summarizes this case and the applicable law. Accordingly, the magistrate judge's report and recommendation is AFFIRMED, and the complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice and without issuance and service of process.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for expedited proceedings is deemed MOOT.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
_____________
David C. Norton
United States District Judge
October 17, 2012
Charleston, South Carolina
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
The parties are hereby notified that any right to appeal this Order is governed by Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.